Project Pavise
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 332200084
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Ashland, OH, USA
- Phone
- 4196511403
- Rating
- 59
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Public, Society Benefit N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $77,993
- Expenses
- $43,930
- Assets
- $34,063
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Benjamin Spieldenner (President)
- John Teevan (President)
People named in this filing
- Benjamin Spieldenner (President)
- John Teevan (President)
- Kristin Aspen (Board Member)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The goal of Project Pavise is to provide social media and internet safety resources and training for students, parents, teachers, coaches, and anyone involved in mentoring children and teens. All of our time is allocated to the activity - primarily programmatic, with necessary administration. The activity is primarily funded through grants and other donations. All expenses are allocated to this activity. The exempt purpose is fulfilled through planned educational activities in that young people and adults in their lives will be better informed, with conversation encouraged, and equipped to stay safe and make better choices with their digital lives.
What it reported doing in 2025
Deployment of Project Pavise (social media safety and awareness program) to approximately 400 middle school students and approximately 600 parents in the spring of 2025.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 32
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 60
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 25.1%; rating input score 25
- Program expense ratio: 44.6%; rating input score 45
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 43.7%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.78; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 25.1% of revenue deployed · 44.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $20K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
- People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 25/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 45/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.